Planetary Material Conditions => Peak oil => Topic started by: K-Dog on Apr 03, 2024, 11:42 AM
Title: Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Apr 03, 2024, 11:42 AM
Quote2050? 2100? Never? That's understandable given the IPCC models access to oil until 2100; politicians like Rishi are betting big on North Sea deposits. Petroleum is the life blood of our global economy, and it's difficult to imagine it drying up. More often, when we talk about transitioning away from fossil fuels, it's because of the necessity to limit global warming—not because we run out.
But a team in Scotland are warning exactly that—we're running out. Fast. Alister Hamilton is a researcher at the University of Edinburgh and the founder of Zero Emissions Scotland. He and his colleagues self-funded research into oil depletion around the world and the results are shocking: We will lose access to oil around the world in the 2030s.
They calculated this by establishing the Energy Return On Investment (EROI) and found that whilst there will still be oil deposits around the world, we would use more energy accessing the oil supply than we would ever get from burning it. This is because we're having to mine further into the earth's crust to access lower-grade oil. According to their calculations, the oil in the North Sea will be inaccessible—in a dead state—by 2031, and the oil in Norway by 2032. Around the world, oil reserves see the same trend through the 2030s.
Petroleum is the life blood, and we haven't yet built out a different circulatory system to support renewable energy—in less than a decade, the world as know it could crash.
I fixed it. Will Crash
Rachel Donald did good on this one!
Critics of peak oil conveniently forget about EROEI. Oil will be left, shale rock will hold oil. But fracked oil will become unobtainable long before it is gone. EROEI screws the pooch.
46 minutes in Alister Hamilton mentions Sterling Engines. I am going to build one. I have been looking at them recently. That part of the discussion is off point. But interesting to me. I want something that will use the earth as a heat ballast and take the air temperature difference to operate from. On a hot day perhaps the cool reservoir could be cooled with evaporation. All I am after is a few watts which I think I can do.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Apr 03, 2024, 02:59 PM
Quote from: K-Dog on Apr 03, 2024, 11:42 AM46 minutes in Alister Hamilton mentions Sterling Engines. I am going to build one. I have been looking at them recently. That part of the discussion is off point. But interesting to me. I want something that will use the earth as a heat ballast and take the air temperature difference to operate from. On a hot day perhaps the cool reservoir could be cooled with evaporation. All I am after is a few watts which I think I can do.
Stirling Engies have long been my favorite low-tech means of converting Solar-Mechanical energy directly, or Solar-Mechanical-Electric by using a simple electric generator instead of needing silicon wafers grown in a laboratory.
Fresnel lenses provide a cheap means of concentration the solar radiation to heat your liquid reservoir to vaporization temprature, then you use the vapor pressure to do the mechanical work of turning a pump or a generator magnet-coil for the electricity.
alternatively or in combination with the fresnel lens, you can use solar heated piping to preheat the cool liquid as it returns from the condenser to the storage tank for heating to vapor stage.
If you can't get your water tank to boiling temperature, you can use a heat exchanger to take the hot water and vaporize a liquid like methanol with a low boiing point. You work with lower pressure so not as much power per stroke, but at lower temperatures it does the job of converting heat to work.
A nice goal to start I think is enough juice to keep cell phones charged, then move up to laptops. Also run a water pump to raise water up to a high storage tank. Then you could use that as a battery to drive a micro-hydro electric generator to make electricity as the water coming down turns a turbine, like a waterfall.
Take some pics or make a video when you get going on the project!
RE
Title: Small World
Post by: K-Dog on Apr 03, 2024, 03:09 PM
I am watching this:
A very cogent discussion. I have been waiting for someone to piss me off, and they have not so far. Pictures of futuristic cities are hopium (unless they are ruins) with green vines growing on them.
Eighteen minutes in Roxanne Meadows mentions George Mobus and systems theory. She questions the Earth's ability to provide endless abundance for all. She says it was possible, but because of bad decision is may not be anymore.
Not your Daddy's Utopia . I ignored Jacque Fresco's Venus Project as a fantasy divorced from reality. It that was true it no longer is. Likely never was, but future hopium tech has not been my thing. Maybe it was bad marketing. The core values seem correct.
The people at the Moneyless Society also have their shit together.
RE and I had Dinner with George Mobus the last time RE came down to Seattle.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Apr 03, 2024, 06:06 PM
That was a fun trip and good chat with George. I stayed at a native run casino where I got all my meals comped for gambling, which you could do just by spending a couple of hours at the dime slot machines. Most you could lose was a couple of dollars, and you got $25 to spend at any of 3 restaurants, a big buffet, a sit down Asian or an Italian Pizza/Hero deli. They had all you can eat Lobster on Wed & Sun at the buffet. I also did real gambliing at the Blackjack tables and won enouggh to cover my hotel bill, so all the trip cost was plane fare. I also got a 1st Class upgrade from my AA miles on the way home.
The real adventure was trying to fit my folding electric scooter of the era into Kdogs trunk of his Mercedes. Hilarious.
Far as the futurist ideas are concerned, the killer was the exponential population growth. If we could have implemented sane birth control policies in the 3rd world and not simply dumped cheap surplus food from the "green revolution" on them, we might have had a shot at the techno utopian dream right up to the early 1980s. That was not to be however, as capitalism saw the growing population as an endless source of cheap labor and voracious consumers.
A utopian future is still a possibility IMHO, but only after a very large population knockdown of 90% or more. Unfortunately, the devastation resulting from such a knockdown probably prevents that from happening also. If I was young and healthy, I'd try to survive to help that be a long term outcome, after the current crop of Masters of the Universe have been sent to the Great Beyond. Perhaps one of my few young readers will carry the torch after I am carved up for dinner for the staff of CNAs here when the food runs out. :)
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Apr 07, 2024, 10:49 PM
Ninety percent of people consider the I.E.A. International Energy Agency a reliable source. It is a Paris-based autonomous intergovernmental organization that provides policy recommendations, analysis, and data on the global energy sector.
Main stream respectable. People involved pass for civilized.
Member countries provide the funding. I do not think the data can be trusted. No country is going to tell the truth about their energy reserves. Since they control the money they never will. This makes the agency a data laundry.
On page 299 of the report there are 235 billion barrels of conventional oil claimed for North America. But Prudhoe Bay only yielded 13 billion barrels of conventional oil. Something stinks. But the current American export rate could not be justified with the truth known so it makes sense. This highly respectable autonomous agency can't be trusted.
Thoughts ?
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: jupiviv on Apr 08, 2024, 02:44 PM
Quote from: K-Dog on Apr 07, 2024, 10:49 PMNinety percent of people consider the I.E.A. International Energy Agency a reliable source. It is a Paris-based autonomous intergovernmental organization that provides policy recommendations, analysis, and data on the global energy sector.
Main stream respectable. People involved pass for civilized.
Member countries provide the funding. I do not think the data can be trusted. No country is going to tell the truth about their energy reserves. Since they control the money they never will. This makes the agency a data laundry.
On page 299 of the report there are 235 billion barrels of conventional oil claimed for North America. But Prudhoe Bay only yielded 13 billion barrels of conventional oil. Something stinks. But the current American export rate could not be justified with the truth known so it makes sense. This highly respectable autonomous agency can't be trusted.
I know Lars Larsen predicts late 2020s as the end of 'available net exports' which is global net export - China+India net imports, thence collapse cus interdependent economies no longer work, war etc etc. I haven't looked into it in detail but an interesting angle. People need to believe in the oil market, which in turn requires assuming it will last til they and preferably the next couple generations are dead.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Apr 08, 2024, 03:14 PM
QuotePeople need to believe in the oil market, which in turn requires assuming it will last til they and preferably the next couple generations are dead.
Or at least everyone has to believe the can can get kicked down the road for a while. Enough time for green tech and space aliens to rescue humanity and change the game. Roll the dice one more time.
NO, an agency that curates truth for and funded by governments will give a truth that is half snake oil, but with the credentials of hard science to bounce the can one more time.
This is where most men of my demographic make themselves irrelevant. Ultimately their fame and fortune depends on the system. Their esteem and identity comes from the system. The system made them what they are, yet they imagine themselves unique. That is a contradiction that sanity must ignore. Consequently an ability for such made men to look within, at themselves. Is not easy to cultivate. As it is said in 'A few good men' - They can't handle the truth.
They can't give up faith in the system. The system has given them special papers which say they know stuff and are special. Somehow they get money. They are threads in the fabric who imagine a system integrity that was never there. They will hear no talk about how sausage is really made and what the ingredients are. New truth must be documented in books before it can become real to such men. They must continue to be deceived.
They cannot howl on the wild side.
What is the point. -- Only that the truth of our predicament will not have a day in the sun anytime soon.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Apr 08, 2024, 06:36 PM
QuotePeople need to believe in the oil market, which in turn requires assuming it will last til they and preferably the next couple generations are dead.
Or at least everyone has to believe the can can get kicked down the road for a while. Enough time for green tech and space aliens to rescue humanity and change the game. Roll the dice one more time.
I was OBSESSED with this song after hearing it in the Sopranos finale. Every hipster prestige drama nowadays is 'ummm capitalism is bad actually?' but that's the only one that somewhat got it right. Like all great art it shows, doesn't tell.
The book/paper I mentioned https://archive.org/details/oil-exports.-34odt-1/Oil%20exports.95odt.odt%285%29.pdf
It's five editions of the same 'book' so just download the last one. Dude's 36, a little older than me and already a cranky old prepper living in the woods lol.
If we take a very conservative, linear approach, and project a global oil production decline of 1,2% upon the future, ten, fifteen years from now, then the decline of global net oil exports is at least the double of that (3), i.e. a 2,4 % yearly decline, which is 2,4 mbd lost per year (if we fix the amount of decline, because in percentage declines the amount of decline slows down with time, which it doesn't do in our case), which gives us almost 13 years if we begin with 30 mbd of global net oil exports (which is a very conservative estimate. Oil geologist Jeffrey J. Brown said we were at 30 in the end of 2021, but there has been a sharp recovery in oil production since, therefore I think we are still at 30 mbd), which brings us to the year 2036.This year must be the absolute upper limit in our calculations.
If we then go to the decline of "ANE" ("Available Net Exports"), which is "GNE" ("Global Net Exports", the totality of global net oil exports) less the Chindia (China and India) region's combined net oil imports, then the decline goes a lot faster, by at least 3 % per year, conservatively estimated. So 3 % of global oil production is ~3 mbd. We have 30 mbd of global net oil exports left, at most (we might in fact be already at 28, 27 or even 26 mbd, which takes us to the end point a bit sooner). This give us only 10 years of "ANE oil". And this brings us to the fall of 2033 (or to 2030-2032 if we are now at 26-28 mbd of global net oil exports, which we very well could be).
This, 2030-2033, is pretty much the best case scenario for the end of global net oil exports, and has been the result of professional licensed oil geologist Jeffrey J. Brown's net oil export calculations. Observe that I have not taken into account that the real decline of both global oil production and global net oil exports is exponential (it's a mathematical certainty), i.e. have an accelerated rate of decline, goes faster and faster. With that in mind, the end of available global net oil exports (ANE) could very well happen well before 2030, which is the thesis in my book on the end of global net oil exports. I could certainly have been a bit too radical in my calculations in this book, but I think the core of it is solid and valid. It will be interesting to see how it all will play out, if there is any out there who tracks these things, which I think we should do.
But this, that we lose at least 3 mbd of "ANE oil" this year, is staggering, unfathomable. And I would also like to add to my book, that if I'm wrong in my predictions, I'm then not wrong by a lot of years, not by a decade, maybe only by one year or two, three at most, five to six years if miracles happen, which is not much in the grand scheme of things (as I said, 2030-2033 is the best case scenario). This should be clear to all who have studied my calculations. Do not shoot the messenger too easily. "The wolf came at last" (read the story I allude to here).
He doesn't count natural gas and light-tight shale and thinks they aren't as 'useful' as diesel. Which is highly debatable. Not my field so idk.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Apr 09, 2024, 08:17 AM
Quote from: jupiviv on Apr 09, 2024, 03:13 AMHe doesn't count natural gas and light-tight shale and thinks they aren't as 'useful' as diesel. Which is highly debatable. Not my field so idk.
Well, when his latest suspension finishes, I'm sure MKing(Tddos) will drop in his expert opinion on these calculations. If he can manage to do it without insulting us or violating one of the other conditions of his participation on this forum, I might even leave it up.
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Apr 09, 2024, 11:04 AM
Quote from: jupiviv on Apr 09, 2024, 03:13 AMHe doesn't count natural gas and light-tight shale and thinks they aren't as 'useful' as diesel. Which is highly debatable. Not my field so idk.
Well, when his latest suspension finishes, I'm sure MKing(Tddos) will drop in his expert opinion on these calculations. If he can manage to do it without insulting us or violating one of the other conditions of his participation on this forum, I might even leave it up.
RE
Yes, he hosed himself good. Got his foot real wet.
After his juvenile insults got his ass banned, half a dozen things he would like to deny were posted.
Title: Peak Oil Chat: Transition w/ Simon Michaux
Post by: K-Dog on Apr 09, 2024, 06:22 PM
2 hours? Can you give us a brief synopsis of this marathon talk fest? Maybe give us the time on a coupe of highlights? Last time I listened to Simon I was not impressed.
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Apr 09, 2024, 07:10 PM
I am an hour and twelve minutes in now. Simon went through a divorce ten years ago and his wife character assassinated him. She messed up an intentional community he was involved in or something. Did more than the sea level rise perhaps? We do not have to know.
Talk of sea level rise, iron powder and other magic bullets that would take more organization than short term thinking will or can do. The panel has the good sense to know as the future unwinds, the cost of doing everything is going red queen. Despite a few burps of technonarcissism the panels digestion of reality is reasonable.
The faster you run, the more you stay in the same place. A lot of talk about making Hawaii into a food forest and thorium reactors to make the big island into a self-sufficient micro civilization able to reproduce enough modern technology on a sustainable basis to stay modern. Simon pointed out while that is a great plan, nothing in Hawaii is organized to make this happen.
A mix of sanity and wild-assed dreaming.
Fun facts, if Britain had half the population and used 1/8 the energy they now do the Island would be sustainable. Like Sandy said in the comments. She learns something new every time.
Title: Hawaii is "on the verge of catastrophe," locals say, as water crisis continues
Post by: RE on Apr 12, 2024, 12:51 AM
Quote from: K-Dog on Apr 09, 2024, 07:10 PMA lot of talk about making Hawaii into a food forest and thorium reactors to make the big island into a self-sufficient micro civilization able to reproduce enough modern technology on a sustainable basis to stay modern. Simon pointed out while that is a great plan, nothing in Hawaii is organized to make this happen.
Forget the organization, Hawaii is far too overpopulated for it's available resources for growing food or water to drink. Before you even think about reorganizing and making it a sustainable food forest, either 90% of the population has to emmigrate off the Island or die off. Also helpful would be sea level to stop rising and rainfall to return to preindustrial levels. Then you also need to wait for the chemicals to rinse out of the aquifer.
This idea ranks right up there with micro-nukes solving our energy deficit problems. Simon and his crew are hopium addicts.
Hawaii is "on the verge of catastrophe," locals say, as water crisis continues
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Apr 12, 2024, 10:13 AM
QuoteSimon and his crew are hopium addicts.
I can't agree. Hopium addicts are out of touch with reality. Simon and his crew are not. They do calculations and figure this or that out, and at the end of the day they are saying. Oh fuck, we are fucked! Just like I do. Just like you do.
Who was it that was in here extolling the virtues of flow batteries a few weeks ago? Who was that hopeasaurus?
If you have criticism worth sharing we could get in touch with Simon and make a video. But if you are just bitching I'll ask why. We are all on the same team here. If Simon and I got to talking things could get interesting. We are both engineers.
Concerning hopium. Simon I and others can figure out how to make things work. Collapse could be designed with a reasonably soft landing engineered in. But that won't happen. The problem is people.
People were going off the 'deep end' concerning peak oil twenty years before climate change came along. Global heating was a back story on NPR when you and I were preaching doom and gloom.
Did we wake anybody up with our rantings? Only people who wanted to rant with us for whatever reason. People who benefit greatly from current arrangements have their own tribe. We are their enemy. They being the dominant tribe construct the narrative that keeps everyone else in thrall. It was a knee-jerk thoughtless reaction for them to recognize that we are not part of their narrative. This is something I did not understand starting out. I thought people could be convinced by logic and reason. I did not understand that cultural conditioning will defeat logic, and self-interest makes people stupid.
Simon and his crew don't get that the elite have had a few hundred years to develop an elite culture that seamlessly excludes everyone else. With an appearance of not doing so. That is the big problem. Bigger than the technical issues. Western culture is fine with some people getting some, and some people getting none.
A system that refines exploitation is not intellectually able to deal with a new world where limits make the consequences of exploitation a necessary part of the calculation. That the system can't deal with externalities and humans are unable to see externalities is bad enough. What makes things horrible is consideration of externalities cuts profit. Dealing with consequences means there is less to skim on the top. Capitalism lives off the skim. (theft)
The lifestyle of many Americans depends upon profits. In a world of change profits generally suffer.
It is easy to see the problems as technical, and the natural human urge is to solve problems. But collapse is a social problem first, and a technical problem second. Society controls what technology is used and how it is used. Simon, I and any other smarty pants who come up with a technical solutions are only pawns in a game. We are ignored unless we are useful for other reason.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it. A rentier has a salary that depends on him not understand the details of where the profit he/she exploits comes from. If you have a passive income you are going to tolerate injustice. Your understandings will be by your own choice limited in scope.
Capitalism depends on maximizing exploitation. The salary of everyone who has any power in America comes from the exploitation of someone else. The American system is engineered to keep anyone who does actual real work powerless.
Cultural hegemony keeps things going full speed to oblivion. Everyone is united in their stupidity. Nurds make You-Tube Videos that get 2K views if they are good. They imagine they make a difference. Videos that support existing arrangements dominate with millions of views.
Things could not be more fucked up now if Satan himself were pulling the strings.
It is foolish to be convinced without evidence, but it is equally foolish to refuse to be convinced by real evidence. The real evidence says that for the second month in a row CO2 is up over 1% for the year. Sorry to tell you this Greta, but your generation does not hold any power, and for all your rantings you are ignored with CO2 emissions higher than they have ever been. The dependence on the finite resource has never been higher.
I am the only one who looks at what the annual change in CO2 is every month. It is published on the main page. The calculation accounts for seasonal variation. In a nation of hundreds of millions I am the only one who does this. At a website actively repressed by the deep state.
The future of humanity is in peril, but a nation committed to quarterly profit can not see another way.
The four horsemen wait to ride. The horses chomp on the bit.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Apr 12, 2024, 11:37 AM
I told you last time after watching the video about the micro nukes I would be happy to do a talking heads show with Simon. Nobody ever contacted me after that.
As far as it not being hopium with the food forests in Hawaii, after reading the article about the problems with the aquifer, rising sea level and diminishing rainfall, not to mention the outrageous population density (they have the population of Alaska on a Postage Stamp in the middle of the Pacific), HTF is that the least bit realistic?
RE
Title: The Oil Crash Is Coming Sooner Than We Think
Post by: RE on Apr 15, 2024, 01:44 PM
Looks like we have a new SHTF Date to wait for: 2031. :-\ Not quite 2 decades after the feared Mayan prognosticaltion of 12/21/2012 for TEOTWAWKI. This is when this article predicts North Sea oil to be net energy negative. It predicts also that globally all oil will be net energy negative by the end of the 2030s.
However, why this is not quite as bad as it sound comes early in the article with the current state of Alaska oil: "Alaska's oil production became net-energy negative in 2021." If it's negative, why pump it?
Because the energy to pump it up comes from NG, which is extracted along with oil and can't be sold itself because there's no NG pipeline or LNG production facility to get the NG from the slope to markets where it might be burned directly to produce electricity. So it's essentially free energy to use for pumping up the oil remaining there. In fact there's so much extra NG they have to flare it off because they have nowhere to store it either.
Similarly, a deep sea oil extraction platform could get power to pump up oil from the depths of the ocean utilizing a Wind Turbine at the surface to power the rig. No way to get the electricity itself to shore, but you can use it right there to pump up the oil. Essentially free energy also except for the cost of the turbine.
So this really doesn't tell us when the lights will go out here in the FSoA, just that things are going to get a lot dicier moving forward. We already knew that though.
Title: Chevron CEO reveals when US will see the 'end of the oil age'
Post by: RE on May 07, 2024, 05:33 PM
Which according to the Chevron CEO, is not anytime too soon. Chevron will still be pumping up the black gold for the stockholders in 2040. He does not buy the Hydrogen Hype.
By preparing for this "volatility" with a balance sheet that can withstand an extended period of "very low prices," Chevron's CEO noted that the company predicts it will deliver 10% compound annual growth in free cash flow over the next several years.
"Driven by the Permian, driven by some other shale assets in our portfolio, projects in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico," Wirth pointed out, "we've got a number of other assets that are delivering growth. And the combination with Hess only strengthens our cash flow longer into the future, not only to the end of this decade, but well into the next."
Chevron CEO reveals when US will see the 'end of the oil age'
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on May 07, 2024, 10:56 PM
Quote from: RE on May 07, 2024, 05:33 PMWhich according to the Chevron CEO, is not anytime too soon. Chevron will still be pumping up the black gold for the stockholders in 2040. He does not buy the Hydrogen Hype.
By preparing for this "volatility" with a balance sheet that can withstand an extended period of "very low prices," Chevron's CEO noted that the company predicts it will deliver 10% compound annual growth in free cash flow over the next several years.
"Driven by the Permian, driven by some other shale assets in our portfolio, projects in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico," Wirth pointed out, "we've got a number of other assets that are delivering growth. And the combination with Hess only strengthens our cash flow longer into the future, not only to the end of this decade, but well into the next."
What does honesty have to do with it? Hubbert was honest in both 1938 and 1956. Turns out honesty isn't the issue.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Jun 06, 2024, 11:35 AM
A two year old discussion that will be of interest to the hard-core doomer. The fossil gurus are mentioned.
Peter's website: Toxic Plants Blog (https://toxicplantsblog.blogspot.com/)
There seems to be no understanding of the Seneca Cliff in the conversation. Something the 'Greer' Camp gets wrong.
The catabolic collapse relates to doom, the same way democratic socialism relates to anarcho-primitivism.
Both speakers suffer from affluensa. They know our days are numbered, but their affluensa causes both of them to be accepting of business as usual. Content to watch collapse from a perch of comfort and safety. One motivation for catabolic collapse among others. It appeals tto the affluent. That said there is insight in the discussion despite a foolish excursion into vertical farm bullshit, literally. Vertical farms have shadows. Vertical farms could only be on the north edge of New York Cities' Central Park. The ones behind are in shade. Total hopium, elucidated using basic geometry.
I take issue with the discussion. The Seneca cliff kills tight oil production. When million of dollars of equipment and coordination are needed to bring new oil to market society will depend on a house of cards. When that house of cards falls we have peak oil in spades. It will take more than spades to get at the tight oil bonanza which will become unattainable.
The limits to growth will be reached. The result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.
Peak pain. In a wasted broken-down polluted word.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: TDoS on Jun 09, 2024, 07:22 AM
Ugo, when discussing the Senece Cliff on Facebook, also provided examples that included a rebound...the cliff not being an absolute.
In your opinion, does LTO production then recover in sync with this rebound, should it occur?
I do not believe you. The Seneca cliff represents a cascade failure from which there is no recovery. Ugo will not be saying there is a recovery from that.
The idea that civilization can exploit tight oil, stop doing it, and then exploit it again after the technical base to access tight oil is lost is ridiculous. Peak oil was show to be correct doctrine and all easy to get oil is almost gone. The depletion of petroleum followed peak oil math. In the years to come tight oil will do the same.
Be careful what you claim. RE and I know Ugo. Ugo knows I am working on Limits to Growth software. Ugo and I communicated last week.
And I am making good progress.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jun 09, 2024, 11:08 AM
Ugo has a Hopium streak that appears when he starts talking about renewables, so I wouldn't completely discount him generating some kind of scenario where there would be a recovery after a Seneca style rapid collapse.
Also, unless you believe we are on a one way steady progression to extinction, a leveling out and then rebound is the only other possible outcome. That's what happened when the population of Homo Saps fell off a Seneca Cliff 75,00years ago and dwindled to just 10,000 meat packages. It's also true for smaller collapses, like Rome. The city itself dropped in population to just a few thousand after the western Roman Empire collapsed, but eventually rebounded through the middle ages.
However, on a scale of a human lifetime, if you have a Seneca collapse, you would never be able to get back to that level so fast. It takes many generations to recover.
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Jun 09, 2024, 11:53 AM
The old kingdom fell and there was chaos in Egypt. Three generations of road warrior fun times without the road. Then the Middle Kingdom. Tut-tut the people are organized, but then the Middle Kingdom falls. Three generations of road warrior fun times without the road again. Then the New Kingdom. The New Kingdom falls and then, Libyan Pharaohs,
Libyan Pharaohs were Egyptian Idiocracy times. (https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fvignette.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fp__%2Fimages%2F8%2F87%2F960-0.jpg%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20160723184542%26path-prefix%3Dprotagonist&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=bd306926b768e59fd98d896269e2d77c2f6f99192c1d04da376ff9f2e3eb7a4c&ipo=images)
and then Alexander the great. A bad ass-mofo conquering dawg.
What do we mean by rebound. This is too abstract.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jun 09, 2024, 04:47 PM
To know that, we'd need to know the contents of the Facepalm post His Royal Trollness was referring to that Ugo supposedly made. Since I don't follow Facepalm, I have no idea what this might be. We'll have to wait since HRT is back in the cooler for being persistently insulting.
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: TDoS on Jun 11, 2024, 01:00 PM
Quote from: TDoS on Jun 09, 2024, 07:22 AMUgo, when discussing the Senece Cliff on Facebook, also provided examples that included a rebound...the cliff not being an absolute.
In your opinion, does LTO production then recover in sync with this rebound, should it occur?
I do not believe you. The Seneca cliff represents a cascade failure from which there is no recovery. Ugo will not be saying there is a recovery from that.
Facts do not require your belief. I was the one who pointed out that the very graphs and metrics Ugo used to show the Senece Cliff also showed a recovery. He postulated that in the given circumstance it had, and it might require some further work to see what those circumstances were.
Don't like what Ugo said? Tough noogies. Go find someone who doesn't know what they are talking about to call a liar.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jun 11, 2024, 01:09 PM
Quote from: TDoS on Jun 09, 2024, 07:22 AMUgo, when discussing the Senece Cliff on Facebook, also provided examples that included a rebound...the cliff not being an absolute.
In your opinion, does LTO production then recover in sync with this rebound, should it occur?
I do not believe you. The Seneca cliff represents a cascade failure from which there is no recovery. Ugo will not be saying there is a recovery from that.
Facts do not require your belief. I was the one who pointed out that the very graphs and metrics Ugo used to show the Senece Cliff also showed a recovery. He postulated that in the given circumstance it had, and it might require some further work to see what those circumstances were.
Don't like what Ugo said? Tough noogies. Go find someone who doesn't know what they are talking about to call a liar.
Can you provide us with a link so we can see the context of this analysis?
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: TDoS on Jun 11, 2024, 01:19 PM
Deleted my Facebook account years ago. I believe the conversation was on the peak oil group, where I was keeping an eye on another long time acolyte in the Church of Peak. His Seneca work had already been out for awhile, and he was deep in the past examining a culture that had declined, it might have been the Romans, and the metric he had identified as having a cliff profile stopped decreasing and reversed. When matched to the history of Rome, there was a question as to whether or not recoveries were possible, based on the metric he was using in that example. He began speculating on what the metric might mean compared to the events in real time, and postulated that he might have to examine Senece Recoveries to see if there was any value or frequency to the idea.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jun 11, 2024, 02:21 PM
You can find posts I made 15 years ago on Peak Oil and you can't find a post from Ugo? Come on. How long ago was this? In any event, "speculation" doesn't sound like he was very convinced of the idea.
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: TDoS on Jun 11, 2024, 03:07 PM
I can remember (not just find) your claims about toyota going bankrupt from 16 years ago, but never found Facebook much to my taste. The ability to create echo chambers there was easy and utilized far more often than among the more old school forum style places. Plus, I got banned for being way too much peak oil expert for them, same as other places.
Quote from: RECome on. How long ago was this?
I probably erased my last Facebook account at least....6 years ago? Maybe 7? I only know that because the owner of the Facebook peak oil forum (powers of a God...mind as sluggardly as the normies) was calling for 2018 as the end, and 2018 wasn't quite there yet. Spent a bunch of time with Alice as well, couldn't believe the things she didn't know, for as voluminous as her website is with occasionally good references. Half baked conclusions, but she was a believer, and that made her interesting.
So somewhere back thereabouts.
Quote from: REIn any event, "speculation" doesn't sound like he was very convinced of the idea. RE
He appeared to be in the pondering stage, so I don't know what level of convinced or anything else he arrived at. Didn't much care at the time, became far more interested in Simon Michaux.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jun 11, 2024, 03:33 PM
In that case, I suspect he would agree with what we said, which is any recovery would take generations.
RE
Could be. Can't recall the time scale of the graphs he was using, or the particular metric. Only that it went down...Sceneca Cliff!!....and then it began recovering. He used the term "Seneca Recovery", not me. Don't know if he spent any further time on it or not.
I do know that I was there. And K-Dog wasn't. And if the two of you want to interpret what Ugo said that is one thing. But calling me a liar from a position of absolute ignornace is rude.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jun 11, 2024, 06:01 PM
You complaining about somebody being rude is laughable. ::)
Sort of like someone who wasn't there for a conversation proclaiming that those who were lied about its content? Laughable indeed.
It is quite touching though, a one legged man standing up :) to defend he who was rude.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jun 12, 2024, 02:14 PM
Since you can't produce the evidence of the quote you reference, it's not laughable. Based on your misrepresentations of many "Peak Oilers" you disagree with, it wouldn't be out of character for you to misrepresent what Ugo wrote.
I have one leg, but good balance, and besides I am sitting most of the time anyhow.
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: TDoS on Jun 12, 2024, 06:11 PM
Just because people know stuff that you don't, and you can't confirm because you don't hang in the right circles but prefer echo-chambers, and others obviously have far better memories of minor details of your own posting history (and mine pretty well too!), and it is all unscientific to do anything other than represent as best as possible (for courts, conferences, schooling the XOM folks in New Jersey or teaching PhD level students), but you pretend that I misrepresent is all you got?
All you've got is the Forum Power to ban/erase/censor/"pretend you know what Ugo said". Enjoy.
And you have my sympathy that it is the best you can do in terms of accomplishment.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: Toxic Plants Blog on Jun 20, 2024, 04:00 AM
Peter's website: Toxic Plants Blog (https://toxicplantsblog.blogspot.com/)
Thanks for mentioning my blog, but I think that podcast I did with KMO was my least successful guest appearance ever (not that I've done very many of them). For a start, we had problems with the audio, resulting in me not being able to use the headset I was intending to use, and having to switch to alternative equipment which resulted in me not being able to hear the sound of my own voice when I was talking, which was really off putting and interfered with my concentration. Then there was the conflicting philosophy between myself and KMO. As long time peak oil followers may remember, KMO went "all in" for peak oil, left his job and his family, went to live on an organic farm while he waited for the imminent collapse which never arrived, and probably ended up feeling rather foolish, which gave him a jaundiced view of peak oil forever after. On the other hand, I kept a foot in both worlds, and continued with my daytime job while researching and preparing for peak oil, which turned out to be far more sensible (and I'm still doing it). Then towards the end of the interview, KMO ran out of things to ask me and just started rabbiting on about anything to fill in the 60 minutes. You can hear it all and judge for yourself if you listen to the podcast, but quite frankly I wouldn't recommend it! Far better to visit my blog and read my latest post on the upcoming UK General Election.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Jun 20, 2024, 09:47 AM
TO,
Welcome,
QuoteA more realistic approach would be to redesign our living arrangements so there is less need to transport people and materials.
We seem to have convergent evolution going on. That is my position too. But we dream. Dream with green? Attempts to mitigate with green, green, green is a trip on the river of De-Nile. Only a fundamental change in living arrangements can make a dent, could matter at all. I wish it could be more than a dream. Fundamental change is unpopular.
I support carbon Fee and Divided which is not a tax as you know. Government gets the proceeds of tax. Fee and dividend is a redistribution that would encourage natural human self-interest to make needed behavioral change.
QuoteOn the other hand, I kept a foot in both worlds, and continued with my daytime job while researching and preparing for peak oil, which turned out to be far more sensible (and I'm still doing it).
As you say: "If you stand on a bridge over a major highway, or stand on a hill overlooking a city at night, you get a visceral sense of the enormity of the problem. How can we possibly convert all those thousands of vehicles passing under the bridge every hour, to net zero? How can we possibly convert all of that city's electric light to net zero?"
It is not in the math. Often there is talk, and even hard core doomers will make the mistake of portraying overshoot as something that 'will happen' if people don't do something. Truth is, overshoot is here, and has been for a while. Now we wait for system delays to kick-in inevitable consequences. Green thinking is denials' success at not reading the room. Of not understanding the delay.
The earth does not do things on a timescale humans can relate to. KMO and others who went off the 'deep end' did not appreciate this. Net zero is an extreme that errs in the other way. Net zero is 'throw me in the shallow water before I get too deep'. Net zero wants to put lipstick on a pig. Extreme fear of the water. Fear of change.
QuoteI make no distinction between residents or immigrants on the basis of nationality, religion or ethnic origin. I have every sympathy for economic migrants and refugees, and I fully understand why they want to seek a better life elsewhere.
I thought only RE and I thought this way. What to do about the situation is complicated.
Welcome to the Diner.
* You are only a 'Useless Eater' for a few posts.
Title: BP Predicts Global Oil Demand Will Peak In 2025
Post by: RE on Jul 10, 2024, 07:20 PM
In the Great Peak Oil Poker Game, BP saw the IEAs 2029 Peak Demand by 2029 and raised to 2025. Bloomberg apparently also is betting with the shorts on this. I will maintain my opinion this has less to do with conversion to EVs, Net Zero and Carbon Credits and more to do with the likelihood of a major recession getting underway.
Far as the trading goes, it's been hanging range bound between $80-85 for about the last month, after the initial panic in June when it dropped to the $70s after the IEA announcement. Based on recent stories, I'm expecting a recession announcement in 2-3 months. That will be a good test if it comes to pass.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: TDoS on Jul 10, 2024, 08:54 PM
Quote from: RE on Jul 10, 2024, 07:20 PMIn the Great Peak Oil Poker Game, BP saw the IEAs 2029 Peak Demand by 2029 and raised to 2025. Bloomberg apparently also is betting with the shorts on this. I will maintain my opinion this has less to do with conversion to EVs, Net Zero and Carbon Credits and more to do with the likelihood of a major recession getting underway.
I'll buy that for a dollar!! The more blood in the streets the better, any investor worth their salt isn't going to mind exctly what is needed for an improved return on investment environment. 2008 was an excellent example.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jul 10, 2024, 11:33 PM
So you're going short on oil? Make some money betting the demand dropping?
RE
Title: Argentina’s future lies in the balance as vast oilfields poised for extraction
Post by: RE on Jul 11, 2024, 08:20 PM
Clearly the Argentinians have not read the IEA or BP predictions. lol. Arriving a little late to the party. Now the question is, who will pony up and finance the drilling? Since the IEA projects a supply GLUT for the next decade, it doesn't seem to be a very attractive investment opportunity. The Brit banks aren't financing new FF drilling in the North Sea, but maybe they would hand over money to Argentina for drilling?
Argentina's future lies in the balance as vast oilfields poised for extraction
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Jul 12, 2024, 12:27 AM
Quote from: RE on Jul 11, 2024, 08:20 PMhttps://www.theguardian.com/global-development/article/2024/jul/11/argentinas-future-lies-in-the-balance-as-vast-oilfields-poised-for-extraction
Argentina's future lies in the balance as vast oilfields poised for extraction
RE
Privatize the commons, full speed ahead. Let no crying infant or starving widow stop you. As the preforming Argentinian clown just said:
Starting the delivery of his go-to manifesto about the evils of socialism, and virtues of the free market, Milei gave a hearty hug to Brazil's hard-right former President Javier Bolsonaro, who just days earlier was indicted by federal police in a scheme to embezzle Saudi diamonds.
QuoteMy friend Jair Bolsonaro is suffering judicial persecution,
Milei said onstage from the conference in Brazil's southern city of Balneario Camboriu.
Che would not be happy.
* Bozo is getting Trumped and Trump is not.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: TDoS on Jul 12, 2024, 07:52 AM
So you're going short on oil? Make some money betting the demand dropping?
RE
I tend to bet overall market performance, not specific stocks, industries or commodities.
So for example when a decent recession is coming, I move from market tracking funds to fixed returns, and back again when things begin to turn. Made an absolute killing timing the end of the world with peak oil 2008 (according to the experts at TOD) and bet the wrong way a few years ago coming out of the market during Covid rather than before it. Stayed in that position to long, but got back in in time to get substantial benefit from the post Covid government spending spree and weird housing market reaction that came along with it. Went short on the market about 3 months ago, but not a bunch. Just a little.
Oil is irrelevant in the overall scheme of things from my investing perspective. Too myopic of a perspective.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: TDoS on Jul 12, 2024, 07:58 AM
Quote from: RE on Jul 11, 2024, 08:20 PMClearly the Argentinians have not read the IEA or BP predictions. lol. Arriving a little late to the party. Now the question is, who will pony up and finance the drilling? Since the IEA projects a supply GLUT for the next decade, it doesn't seem to be a very attractive investment opportunity. The Brit banks aren't financing new FF drilling in the North Sea, but maybe they would hand over money to Argentina for drilling?
Argentina's future lies in the balance as vast oilfields poised for extraction
RE
Recently, during evaluations of offshoe resources in Guyanna, this problem reared its ugly head. In the States with continuous resource development (LTO and shale gas for those unfamiliar with the terms) it comes down to IRR across a sequence of CapX investment in a cycle. They get the discount from the service companies for the work, pound it all out and stand back and check to see that the mean of the IRR for all is reasonable, and begin playing hedging games and whatnot. Reevaluate and do it again.
The international actors are completely different. Walk into the room with some energy minister or another and begin laying out costs, timing and particulars, and when you discuss the 15% iRR that can be achieved, you get told to go back to the drawing board and find 25-30% iRR projects to fund. Think of them as being loan sharks compared to how the domestic E&Ps do it.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jul 12, 2024, 11:48 AM
Quote from: TDoS on Jul 12, 2024, 07:58 AMThe international actors are completely different. Walk into the room with some energy minister or another and begin laying out costs, timing and particulars, and when you discuss the 15% iRR that can be achieved, you get told to go back to the drawing board and find 25-30% iRR projects to fund. Think of them as being loan sharks compared to how the domestic E&Ps do it.
The problem of course is that you project your IRR at what you THINK the oil will sell at when the well starts producing. If you say you think it will sell for $80 but when the well comes online it's at $60, your revenue is 25% less than projected. Obviously you have to convince the energy minister you are right and the IEA is wrong. This makes it a risky investment. The banks that ponied up money before the price dropped down to $30-50 between 2015-2021 took a serious bath since it had been selling at $90-100 in 2014.
So what price would you have penciled in right now (hypothetically) when you make your pitch to the Argentinians?
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: TDoS on Jul 13, 2024, 06:58 PM
Quote from: TDoS on Jul 12, 2024, 07:58 AMThe international actors are completely different. Walk into the room with some energy minister or another and begin laying out costs, timing and particulars, and when you discuss the 15% iRR that can be achieved, you get told to go back to the drawing board and find 25-30% iRR projects to fund. Think of them as being loan sharks compared to how the domestic E&Ps do it.
The problem of course is that you project your IRR at what you THINK the oil will sell at when the well starts producing.
What an interesting understanding of stochastic modeling you have. Would you care to volunteer your suggestion of the best futures hedging profile you would use across the life of the resource development project at the national level?
In my stochastic modeling, the tornado plot clearly demonstrates that price isn't even in the top 5 variables in terms of effect on the IRR profile through time. How else can you decide the best TIME to stop the project to maximize the overall result?
The IRR outcome is a probability density function at the annual level, based on all the other underlying probabilities as they play off against each other. More hedging, less hedging, future tax expectations, import/export considerations and refinery locations and costs in the GOM, long term contracts or short, geopolitical risk of a particular or general nature, initial investment all up front or development of multiple projects involved in stages, etc etc. Financing if it is included, etc etc. Some customers will take lower IRRs along with less hedging costs, different expections of ranges in exchange rates among currencies, etc etc.
Just run of the mill stochastic modeling, state of the art and no different than companies do for similar projects.
Like I said...oil price isn't even in the top 5 in terms of the uncertainty involved.
Quote from: REIf you say you think it will sell for $80 but when the well comes online it's at $60, your revenue is 25% less than projected.
Depends on your hedging profile. Yours in this example appears to be none. How...quaint.
Quote from: REObviously you have to convince the energy minister you are right and the IEA is wrong.
You are kidding, right? Name the geologic expertise and its caliber available to the IEA.
Quote from: REThis makes it a risky investment.
Is that the conclusion energy ministers reach after seing your deterministic calculations? How do you answer if they say "and what might the IRR range and discounted return on initial investment be if we hedge at a price 10% higher than last run for the first 3 years from the starting point of the first capital expenditure tranche"?
Quote from: REThe banks that ponied up money before the price dropped down to $30-50 between 2015-2021 took a serious bath since it had been selling at $90-100 in 2014. So what price would you have penciled in right now (hypothetically) when you make your pitch to the Argentinians? RE
Oh goodness. How would any of us internet yahoos ever be able to answer such a difficult question? A deterministic price path instead of a probabilistic one with correlations for rates of change through time to back out a range of IRRs? The complexity if just mind blowing for us internet yahoos.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jul 13, 2024, 08:08 PM
Blah blah blah, you didn't answer my question.
Just pretend I am a dumb ass bankster who has authority to loan you $100M to get some wells producing Oil. You are in my office in Buenos Aires and I say, OK I'll write you a check if you tell me how many wells you will dig with this and how many barrels of oil they will produce starting next year when you have to make your first monthly coupon payment. I want to know what you expect to sell each barrel of oil for starting Aug 1st 2025 and how many barrels you will produce. If you give me a satisfactory answer, I will ask a few more before I write the check, but answer this first. Otherwise, there's the door, don't let it hit you on the way out.
Now, even though I'm an idiot, if you are condescending and give me lots of bullshit answers, you will not get a penny from me. Nor am I interested in whores or kickbacks, so forget trying to bribe me. I realize most banksters would and you can go down the street to one of them, but I am incorruptible. So answer or I'll have my body guards show you the exit.
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jul 14, 2024, 08:02 PM
Well geez, how am I supposed to answer a question that implies something so opposite of how professionals build these kinds of stochastic models?
By using your world class knowledge of the oil extraction bizness. It's a straightforward question, and all you do is reply with insults.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out. Since you can't answer a simple question,we no longer need your business.
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Jul 15, 2024, 09:06 AM
If all he has is a stochastic model to show you. Tell his the door is behind him and all he has to do is turn around and walk.
Stochastic modeling. Only people firmly grounded in a materialist perspective should play with such sharp objects. They know a model is only a rhyme. Extreme faith in stochastic modeling suggests blind faith in technology to a high probability.
What are the chances? Does you make the world, or does the world make you.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jul 15, 2024, 11:28 AM
I sent him to the cooler for a nice long vacation. I might make it permanent. Not answering direct questions within his area of expertiese makes him useless here. Adding insults to that makes him less than useless.
I'm not interested in his stochastic models. Any business I loan money to has to demonstrate to me how they intend to pay it back. If it's a restaurant, I wanna know how much they will sell the meals for and how many they will sell. I wanna know how much they spend to buy the food and how much their labor costs are. This is Loan Officer 101 stuff if you work in banking. According to Snidley Tdos, banksters don't ask this when he pitches for money, he just shows them his stochastic model and they pony up. I don't buy it, and if in fact that is what they do it's no wonder so many had their loans go south when oil nosedived in 2015.
So, there's really no good reason to keep him around. He doesn't provide any worthwhile or useful knowledge. He can find another forum to troll.
RE
Title: Tellurian Lube
Post by: K-Dog on Jul 15, 2024, 03:29 PM
Start with basic modeling. Stochastic comes way later. Answering your questions about how much are your costs, how much you charge in detail, generates the substance of a basic model.
Argentina is not a politically or economically sound place. It would be foolish to put money there.
Onto another subject. The video seems strange, until you remember the Gaia (https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/gaia-hypothesis) hypothesis, and how tolerant everyone is supposed to be about that.
And I enjoy a bit of what if thinking. There is no lack of it here.
Myth shapes people. No doubt about it.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jul 15, 2024, 05:26 PM
Yup. Especially considering the Kuwaitis just found another 2B barrels of oil & 5T cu ft of NG offshore which they intend on putting into production ASAP. This should increase their contribution to the coming OIL GLUT predicted by the IEA and BP almost doubling it from 2.4M bpd to 4M bpd. Highly doubtful the Argentinians can extract oil from their rocks as cheaply as the Kuwaitis can pump it up from under the Persian Gulf. Add in a likely Recession setting in and we could see Oil drop to $50/bl next year. The only good investment in Argentina is CDS contracts betting they default again on their loans from the IMF.
Enough to keep the wine and cheese crowd going for a month.
The new find is only 1/6 of what has been extracted from Prudhoe, or half of what remains there. Things went exponential. 2 billion barrels is not the find it used to be.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jul 16, 2024, 03:03 AM
Quote from: K-Dog on Jul 15, 2024, 09:17 PMThe new find is only 1/6 of what has been extracted from Prudhoe, or half of what remains there. Things went exponential. 2 billion barrels is not the find it used to be.
True, but they plan on pumping it out rapidly. The plan in to raise their oil production by about 1.5M bls/day. At that rate, they'll have it drained in about 6 years. Prudhoe Bay has been producing oil for more than 40 years. So it's significant on an annual basis. They also say there is evidence for more as well.
RE
Title: Great Depression 2.0 - Is It Already Here?
Post by: RE on Jul 17, 2024, 12:16 AM
The recent EIA prediction that we would reach Peak Oil Demand by 2020 has caused quite a bit of hoopla, with the Saudis vehemently denying it and claiming demand will continue to rise through 2040 at least. These predictions however do not match the ACTUAL CONSUMPTION of oil, which you can only view in retrospect. Peak Oil Consumption prior to Covid came in 2018-19.
The Global Economy basically shut down during CoVid, and oil consumption dropped dramatically. We have been creeping back up to the consumption mark since and in 2023 just surpassed the 2018 peak.
CoVid arrived rather suspiciously just AFTER the consumption peak of 2018-19. If it had arrived before the peak, you could blame the drop on covid, but the order was reversed. On a conspiracy level, I mentioned a while back I find this very suspicious, since it looks like CoVid was used to disguise the peak by screwing up all the economic indicators. This article confirms this and suggests our actual Great Depression v2.0 began with CoVid.
We are used to this kind of language blaming the pandemic for the results of lockdowns. Of course, it was a man-made decision to turn a respiratory virus into an excuse to shut down the world. The lockdowns blew up all economic data, generating seesawing graphs on every indicator never seen in industrial history. They also made before/after comparison extremely difficult.
The consequences will echo long into the future. The high interest rates are a result of trying to slow down the money spigot unleashed in March 2020, in which more than $6 trillion in new cash appeared out of nowhere and was distributed as if by helicopter.
The article goes further to demonstrate how inflation has been used to disguise the falling productivity and why there is such a mismatch between what Da Goobermint claims about our economy and what the truth actually is. The reality is we weren't able to sustain the oil consumption level in 2019 before covid, and we can't sustain it now either. The thing is, we don't have Covid to use as an excuse to shut everything down again, so something else will have to do it. What will that something else be?
I'd bet on either a stock market crash or a banking crisis stemming from the collapse of the commercial real estate market here in the FSoA, or an international banking crisis due to the increasing number of failures of small regional Chinese banks that are being swallowed up in mergers with larger international ones. The currency markets might also fracture along with the bond market.
November with the POTUS election also seems like a possible Crisis Moment, which makes the Assassination attempt on Trumpovetsky more suspicious than just a lone shooter disgruntled science nerd. This may have been set up to begin a political crisis, and since he managed to survive it something else will need to be ginnied up.
On the International level, with the Olympics in Paris and the Frog Goobermint in complete disarray, the possibility of a major Terrorist incident at the Olympics seems high as well. We have clearly reached a critical point and the system is ready to blow.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jul 22, 2024, 11:56 AM
Add Morgan Stanley to BP and the EIA in the Short on Oil betting pool, as they pro0ject a supply glut for 2025 and price drop into the $70 range. That number Is based on their analyses of "fundamentals" of Supply & Demand, and doesn't really take into account the effects of a Recession, which remains IMHO likely to arrive by the end of 2023, if it's not already here. With recession factored in, a price in the $60s is possible, and that's where things really get interesting on the production level. While the tight oil producers probably can squeak by with mid $70s prices, $60s is a big money loser. We're down in the $70s again today already, while Morgan Stanley doesn't call for that until mid-2025. So a drop into the $60s seems probable to me next year.
Despite all these indicators of a coming glut and price drop, there hasn't been any newz about producers reacting by saying they will cut production, probably because they don't want to spook traders and seem bearish about the future of the economy. However, I'm sure they are hedging with some short side bets.
Interestingly, the Newz from the POTUS election on both sides, with Trump"s Bloody Ear and Uncle Joe's swan song doesn't seem to have any effect on the oil market at all, or any other market. In past years something like an Assassination attempt would have generated big changes in sentiment and made significant changes to the needle on pricing. Which basically demonstrates that noobody really cares who is elected or thinks whoever it is will make any difference. Who the POTUS is has become an unimportant detail. The POTUS has about as much real power as the King of England, which is to say none. Just a figurehead these days.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Jul 23, 2024, 03:30 PM
Inflation will make the price higher than 70 $ a barrel.
The addict pays what he/she has to pay.
Oil price models should factor in the price of oil in a feedback look. I suspect they do not.
But I am too busy creating the Dynamo project to find out. My so far, private intellectual dark web. Go to the page and click on the 'book' to see where I have been busy. The irony is this is the exact kind of problem to use Dynamo for. Adding the original Manual makes the project useful. Not by itself, but it gives the background and history. The point is a short learning curve and the manual helps.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Jul 23, 2024, 07:04 PM
Eventually perhaps, but in this cycle if inflation was going to drive it above the $80-84 range it's been trading at for the last year, it would have already done so. In fact globally speaking we're moving into a deflationary cycle already. China is already battling deflation:
In China, Deflation Tightens Its Grip (https://www.wsj.com/economy/chinas-consumer-prices-fall-by-more-than-expected-cbaba7ee)
Today, Oil dropped below the $80 benchmark again, dropping to $77/bl. This is before the real meat of recession hits here, which looks like around Nov to me when they'll actually cop to it, and things will get seriously worse as the bubble of CRE refi's come due in 2025-26. So, IMHO, a price target in the $65 range next year has high confidence on my part. If I was still into the game, I'd short with that target price.
We are of course addicted, but we're also addicted to debt to pay for it and the creditors are insolvent, so credit is getting tighter. There will be bankruptcies, biznesses and factries will close, unemployment will rise. UE people buy less gas and everything else. Falling demand causes falling prices.Addicts who are broke either steal or go into withdrawal. It's hard to steal gas, so I suspect withdrawal to be the general outcome.
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Aug 04, 2024, 10:04 PM
The US shale revolution is on track to produce twenty-one million barrels a day. This is one-fifth of the worlds production.
The speaker is all about expanding hydrocarbon consumption and increasing return for investors. He affects an interest in nuclear to make the exploitation of everyone else and profit for he and his tribe more palatable.
He warns that environmental concerns are a serious concern to a stable revenue stream for investors but with ENOUGH TORT they can be overcome.
1:01:42 The word 'tort' was changed in the closed caption to 'talk' so if a transcript is generated there will not be an issue. There was no way the software could have mistaken 'tort' for 'talk'.
It was a fix.
Motherfucker gave himself away.
* I listened to all of it. If you take the speaker at his word he understands that capitalism will price oil $1.00 above the price that would cause a recession. Priced at this level oil produces the most profit. I hesitate to go down this path as I want less oil used. I advocate for Carbon Fee and Dividend. But by the speakers own words, capitalism will not price oil at a socially correct level. And I'll say, if the speaker is really concerned about long term stability to develop the complex infrastructure needed to get to the new supplies he claims. Nationalization of the resource is the way to go. Worldwide.
If feel like playing the ACP commercial again but I'll spare you. I'll just watch it myself this time. After watching all of this video I need to.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: RE on Aug 05, 2024, 12:19 AM
Quote from: K-Dog on Aug 04, 2024, 10:04 PMIf you take the speaker at his word he understands that capitalism will price oil $1.00 above the price that would cause a recession. Priced at this level oil produces the most profit.
Higher oil prices cause recessions, they reduce profit margins and increase costs to the end consumer. Oil sellers respond to recessions by lowering their prices as much as they can and still make a profit in the attempt tp keep selling the oil. If their production costs are above what the oil is selling for, they have to shut down production.
This is in fact exactly what is happening now, as I predicted. Oil has been dropping from the $80 target price since the beginning of July, and dropped to a fresh low of $72 today. If they get down to the $60s, the expensive tight oil plays aren't profitable. As a result, they are already shutting down production.
U.S. Oil and Gas Drilling Activity Slows Amidst Price Plunge (https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/US-Oil-and-Gas-Drilling-Activity-Slows-Amidst-Price-Plunge.html)
The recession signs are all flashing RED now and we''ll almost certainly be in full blown recession by the end of the year. Main question is whether they can keep it papered over until after the election.
RE
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: K-Dog on Aug 05, 2024, 09:18 AM
Quote from: K-Dog on Aug 04, 2024, 10:04 PMIf you take the speaker at his word he understands that capitalism will price oil $1.00 above the price that would cause a recession. Priced at this level oil produces the most profit.
U.S. Oil and Gas Drilling Activity Slows Amidst Price Plunge (https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/US-Oil-and-Gas-Drilling-Activity-Slows-Amidst-Price-Plunge.html)
The recession signs are all flashing RED now and we''ll almost certainly be in full blown recession by the end of the year. Main question is whether they can keep it papered over until after the election.
RE
Sharp slowdown in US job growth boosts unemployment rate to 4.3% => Nonfarm payrolls increased by 114,000 jobs last month, well below the 215,000 jobs per month added over the last 12 months, and the at least 200,000 that economists say are needed to keep up with growth in the population, accounting for the recent surge in immigration.
At the end of June, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) notified Temporary Protected Status (TPS) beneficiaries from El Salvador, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, and Sudan that the validity period for their work permits (employment authorization documents, or EADs) would be automatically extended through March 9, 2025. USCIS also extended through August 3, 2025, the validity period of EADs issued to Haitian TPS beneficiaries. These automatic extensions follow the extension by U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of the re-registration periods of the TPS designations for these same countries from 60 days to the full 18-month designation period at the end of 2023.
Beneficiaries are normally required to re-register for TPS status for the most recent designation extension for each designated country. The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), however, only permits the Secretary of Homeland Security to designate a country for TPS for a period no longer than 18 months.
USCIS officials revealed at a recent stakeholder engagement that DHS extended the validity of their documents in part because of a low rate of re-registrations from these countries. Almost 50 percent of the eligible El Salvador, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, and Sudan TPS beneficiaries have failed to re-register for TPS for their current respective designation periods.
Eligible applicants may see no reason to pay the fees associated with re-registration given the current administration's nearly non-existent interior enforcement policies. (https://cis.org/Jacobs/USCIS-AutoExtends-Work-Permits-Many-TPS-Beneficiaries)
Welcome to the Wild Wild West.
In March 2021, President Joe Biden tasked Vice President Kamala Harris with working alongside officials in Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras to address the issues driving people to leave those countries and come to the United States.
The Biden-Harris administration said it would focus on five key issues: economic insecurity, corruption, human rights, criminal gang violence and gender-based violence.
Border security and management is the Homeland Security secretary's responsibility.
* I put only the most ridiculous in bold. If you immigrate illegally to become part of the American reserve army of labor make sure there is no gender based violence in your caravan. Armed robbers should also shoot men and women in equal numbers. Unemployment is up by two tenths of a percent last month. The border is wide open and you can put the two words 'incompetent' and 'fascist' together any way you wish to describe all our election choices. Collapse is in the wind.
It is time to walk away from Omelas and find a better way.
QuoteKeep it papered over until after the election.
I doubt it, but the snow job has been effective so far so we shall see.
* Recent headlines:
Two Jordanian nationals in ICE custody over breach at Quantico Marine base: Possible 'ISIS dry run' (https://nypost.com/2024/05/17/us-news/jordanians-in-custody-for-breach-at-quantico-marine-base/https://nypost.com/2024/05/17/us-news/jordanians-in-custody-for-breach-at-quantico-marine-base/)
Multiple sources saying the truck's occupants had recently crossed the southern border into the US and one occupant was on the US government's terrorist watch list. Another source I found says one of this dynamic duo was on an expired student visa, and the other came in using Mr. Toads wild ride across the Mexican Border.
Chinese national detained after breaking onto Marine base in California (https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2024/04/04/chinese-national-detained-after-breaking-onto-marine-base-in-california/)
And who are we to know? When 'it' happens it could be another false flag.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: TDoS on Aug 15, 2024, 02:27 PM
Quote from: K-Dog on Jul 15, 2024, 09:06 AMStochastic modeling. Only people firmly grounded in a materialist perspective should play with such sharp objects. They know a model is only a rhyme.
Indeed. Began this type of modeling in the last century. Quantifying uncertainty in complex systems is a handy skillset in my professional life.
Title: - Peak Oil 101
Post by: TDoS on Aug 15, 2024, 02:28 PM